Beethoven’s Metronome Markings in op. 106
Posted: 19 Oct 2019, 22:39
Many have considered Beethoven’s metronome markings to be too fast, and the result of a faulty metronome, a deaf composer’s “inner hearing” or error. The Sonata op. 106 is a particularly sore point. The opening movement is marked at a ferocious half note = 138, the final fugue at an equally ferocious quarter note =144. Even the scherzo (dotted half = 80 and slow movement (eighth note = 92.) seem too fast. Perhaps all of these tempi should be marked down proportionally?
In trying to solve this riddle, I considered the following external evidence:
1. Beethoven was very concerned about his music being played at the correct tempo and serious about the metronome. He continually had it regulated.
2. His student Czerny generally suggests rather “normal” metronome markings in his book on the performance of Beethoven’s piano works, yet recommends Beethoven’s own indications for op. 106 without a quibble. He also mentions that this sonata must be “well-practiced”, which must be the understatement of all understatements, but implies that this sonata is something special from the technical point of view.
3. Of his piano sonatas, only op. 106 has metronome markings. Is it because Beethoven felt the correct tempo was not only critical, but unusual?
4. There is a strong relationship between the slow movement of op. 106 and the slow movement of Mozart’s Piano Concerto no. 23, which is also in F# minor, also in 6/8, also an Adagio, and which has an opening theme to which Beethoven’s opening theme seems to allude: The relationships seems so strong to me that it is possible that Mozart’s movement influenced Beethoven when he wrote his own piece in a very similar mood. Since Mozart’s slow movement may be played convincingly at eighth note = 92, but not much slower, I think it reasonable to imagine that Beethoven thought of his own slow movement as being in the same tempo.
I also considered the following internal evidence: while some sections of the sonata can work at various tempi, many passages rely on a rapid tempo to be convincing. Examples:
1. It is impossible to imagine the introduction to the Fugue (which Beethoven marked at a sixteenth note = 76) at a slower tempo; and for this reason, it is the one marking that has never been disputed. (This makes the faulty metronome theory problematic.)
2, The opening section of the scherzo works at various tempi, but the strange stagnancy of harmony of the middle section requires Beethoven’s rapid tempo to become the ghostly affair he intended.
3. ms. 1-24 of the first movement can sound majestic and impressive even at half tempo, but ms. 25-33 lose their wild excitement and fall flat. Similarly ms. 39-63 sounds like a tedious exercise at a slower tempo. At Beethoven’s tempo such passages become exciting swirls of sound, which may have been a new effect that he was exploring in this sonata.
4. In the fugue, the stretto in augmentation in ms. 116-125 is incomprehensible at a slow tempo, and the interlude at m. 250 stagnates at anything other than a very fast tempo.
Etc.
In summary, I believe the metronome markings to be correct as marked. We know that Beethoven intended to write a monumental work, a piece that would go to the outer limits of what he could conceive of for the medium and the outer limits of what a pianist can perform. The metronome markings were a well-considered part of the challenge. In fact, because Beethoven was exploring the possibilities of very fast tempi in a piano sonata, the sonata relies on these tempi to be convincing.
But the tempos should be modified as needed for expression, as with any piece by Beethoven.
In trying to solve this riddle, I considered the following external evidence:
1. Beethoven was very concerned about his music being played at the correct tempo and serious about the metronome. He continually had it regulated.
2. His student Czerny generally suggests rather “normal” metronome markings in his book on the performance of Beethoven’s piano works, yet recommends Beethoven’s own indications for op. 106 without a quibble. He also mentions that this sonata must be “well-practiced”, which must be the understatement of all understatements, but implies that this sonata is something special from the technical point of view.
3. Of his piano sonatas, only op. 106 has metronome markings. Is it because Beethoven felt the correct tempo was not only critical, but unusual?
4. There is a strong relationship between the slow movement of op. 106 and the slow movement of Mozart’s Piano Concerto no. 23, which is also in F# minor, also in 6/8, also an Adagio, and which has an opening theme to which Beethoven’s opening theme seems to allude: The relationships seems so strong to me that it is possible that Mozart’s movement influenced Beethoven when he wrote his own piece in a very similar mood. Since Mozart’s slow movement may be played convincingly at eighth note = 92, but not much slower, I think it reasonable to imagine that Beethoven thought of his own slow movement as being in the same tempo.
I also considered the following internal evidence: while some sections of the sonata can work at various tempi, many passages rely on a rapid tempo to be convincing. Examples:
1. It is impossible to imagine the introduction to the Fugue (which Beethoven marked at a sixteenth note = 76) at a slower tempo; and for this reason, it is the one marking that has never been disputed. (This makes the faulty metronome theory problematic.)
2, The opening section of the scherzo works at various tempi, but the strange stagnancy of harmony of the middle section requires Beethoven’s rapid tempo to become the ghostly affair he intended.
3. ms. 1-24 of the first movement can sound majestic and impressive even at half tempo, but ms. 25-33 lose their wild excitement and fall flat. Similarly ms. 39-63 sounds like a tedious exercise at a slower tempo. At Beethoven’s tempo such passages become exciting swirls of sound, which may have been a new effect that he was exploring in this sonata.
4. In the fugue, the stretto in augmentation in ms. 116-125 is incomprehensible at a slow tempo, and the interlude at m. 250 stagnates at anything other than a very fast tempo.
Etc.
In summary, I believe the metronome markings to be correct as marked. We know that Beethoven intended to write a monumental work, a piece that would go to the outer limits of what he could conceive of for the medium and the outer limits of what a pianist can perform. The metronome markings were a well-considered part of the challenge. In fact, because Beethoven was exploring the possibilities of very fast tempi in a piano sonata, the sonata relies on these tempi to be convincing.
But the tempos should be modified as needed for expression, as with any piece by Beethoven.